Shon vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.938 of 2022 of Angamaly Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 376 (2) (n), 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code,1860.

According to the prosecution, petitioner procured consent for a physical relationship with the victim under a false promise to marry and also cheated the victim of a sum of Rs.71, 82,300/- during the period 25-05-2020 to 26-09-2022.

Sri. B.Surjith, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution case is totally false and that petitioner has always been willing to marry the alleged victim. However, for some misunderstanding, the crime has been registered and that petitioner is totally innocent. It was also submitted that the petitioner had never procured any consent for physical relationship with a false promise of marriage, but had every intention to marry the victim. It was also pointed out that to show his bonafides, he had even transferred the property purchased by him and also returned the vehicle purchased to the victim. It was also submitted that petitioner was arrested on 01.11.2022 and has been in custody since then, and that further detention may not be permitted for the peculiar circumstances of the case.

Sri.Basil Chandy Vavachan, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant, vehemently opposed the grant of bail and submitted that petitioner had not only cheated the defacto complainant, but had also procured consent for physical relationship through a false promise of marriage and had therefore raped the victim repeatedly on several days.

Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Persecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that since the investigation is continuing, petitioner ought not be released on bail.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, since petitioner was arrested on 01-11-2022, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the peculiar circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.